| Page 2 of 3 < > |
Prince Harry's Seeing Combat, And British Media Kept Quiet
In this image made available in London, Thursday Feb. 28, 2008, Britain's Prince Harry patrols through the deserted town of Garmisir, Afghanistan, close to Forward Operating Base Delhi, on Wednesday Jan. 2, 2008. Prince Harry has been serving on the front line in Afghanistan with the British Army, according to an announcement by Britain's Ministry of Defence. The Prince, who is third in line to the throne, and is still deployed in the country, has been in Afghanistan since December. The deployment was not reported due to an agreement between the Ministry of Defense and news organizations, including The Associated Press. The story was leaked by an Australian magazine and a German newspaper. (AP Photo/John Stillwell, pool)
(John Stillwell - AP)
TOOLBOX
   Resize
COMMENT
 Discussion Policy
 CLOSE
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Who's Blogging  |
Harry and his older brother, William, are tabloid favorites because of their youthful good looks, their status as sons of one of the world's most famous women and their appetite for late-night drinking sessions at London's most exclusive nightclubs.
The idea that Britain's diverse and highly competitive media outlets could keep a secret about anything struck many observers as remarkable -- particularly when that secret was England's favorite young hell-raising party boy.
"It makes me wonder what else is going on," said John Harmer, 30, a London office worker. "I don't think it can be the first time" that the media have agreed to keep information from the public.
Some wondered whether an agreement among leading media outlets to withhold information would damage the media's credibility. "One wonders whether viewers, readers and listeners will ever want to trust media bosses again," TV broadcaster Jon Snow wrote in his blog. "Or perhaps this was a courageous editorial decision to protect this fine young man?"
Every major news outlet in Britain signed on to the deal, which was struck in three meetings called by top military officials between September and December, according to a media source involved in the process.
At the first session, Gen. Richard Dannatt, head of the British army, and other top officials told 30 to 40 media representatives that they wanted to give Harry a chance to deploy to a war zone -- without specifying which one.
"If he was to have a future in the army, he needed to go," Dannatt said, according to the source, who asked not to be identified because he is not authorized to speak for his company.
Dannatt asked whether the media would agree to a collective blackout. In return, the military would provide photos and a written description of Harry's tour after he returned home.
The media representatives told Dannatt the proposal was "absurd" but said they would consider a blackout that allowed greater access to Harry in the war zone.
Details of the arrangement were hammered out at the second and third meetings. In return for their silence, the media would get access to a pre-deployment interview. They would also be allowed several "embeds" with Harry's unit. Pooled interviews, video footage and photographs of Harry in Afghanistan would be made available to all.
The media agreed not to publish those materials until after Harry's tour ended in April, the source said.
According to an account of the deal posted on the Guardian newspaper's Web site, the military also agreed to bring Harry home on a Friday, which would be convenient for both daily and Sunday papers in Britain.
